The FBI successfully thwarts its own Terrorist plot

Sunday, Nov 28, 2010 06:29 ET
The FBI successfully thwarts its own Terrorist plot
By Glenn Greenwald
Salon
The FBI is obviously quite pleased with itself over its arrest of a 19-year-old Somali-American, Mohamed Osman Mohamud, who -- with months of encouragement, support and money from the FBI's own undercover agents -- allegedly attempted to detonate a bomb at a crowded Christmas event in Portland, Oregon. Media accounts are almost uniformly trumpeting this event exactly as the FBI describes it. Loyalists of both parties are doing the same, with Democratic Party commentators proclaiming that this proves how great and effective Democrats are at stopping The Evil Terrorists, while right-wing polemicists point to this arrest as yet more proof that those menacing Muslims sure are violent and dangerous.

What's missing from all of these celebrations is an iota of questioning or skepticism. All of the information about this episode -- all of it -- comes exclusively from an FBI affidavit filed in connection with a Criminal Complaint against Mohamud. As shocking and upsetting as this may be to some, FBI claims are sometimes one-sided, unreliable and even untrue, especially when such claims -- as here -- are uncorroborated and unexamined. That's why we have what we call "trials" before assuming guilt or even before believing that we know what happened: because the government doesn't always tell the complete truth, because they often skew reality, because things often look much different once the accused is permitted to present his own facts and subject the government's claims to scrutiny. The FBI affidavit -- as well as whatever its agents are whispering into the ears of reporters -- contains only those facts the FBI chose to include, but omits the ones it chose to exclude. And even the "facts" that are included are merely assertions at this point and thus may not be facts at all.

* Continue reading

It may very well be that the FBI successfully and within legal limits arrested a dangerous criminal intent on carrying out a serious Terrorist plot that would have killed many innocent people, in which case they deserve praise. Court-approved surveillance and use of undercover agents to infiltrate terrorist plots are legitimate tactics when used in accordance with the law.

But it may also just as easily be the case that the FBI -- as they've done many times in the past -- found some very young, impressionable, disaffected, hapless, aimless, inept loner; created a plot it then persuaded/manipulated/entrapped him to join, essentially turning him into a Terrorist; and then patted itself on the back once it arrested him for having thwarted a "Terrorist plot" which, from start to finish, was entirely the FBI's own concoction. Having stopped a plot which it itself manufactured, the FBI then publicly touts -- and an uncritical media amplifies -- its "success" to the world, thus proving both that domestic Terrorism from Muslims is a serious threat and the Government's vast surveillance powers -- current and future new ones -- are necessary.

There are numerous claims here that merit further scrutiny and questioning. First, the FBI was monitoring the email communications of this American citizen on U.S. soil for months (at least) with what appears to be the flimsiest basis: namely, that he was in email communication with someone in Northwest Pakistan, "an area known to harbor terrorists" (para. 5 of the FBI Affidavit). Is that enough to obtain court approval to eavesdrop on someone's calls and emails? I'm glad the FBI is only eavesdropping with court approval, if that's true, but certainly more should be required for judicial authorization than that. Communicating with someone in Northwest Pakistan is hardly reasonable grounds for suspicion.

Second, in order not to be found to have entrapped someone into committing a crime, law enforcement agents want to be able to prove that, in the 1992 words of the Supreme Court, the accused was "was independently predisposed to commit the crime for which he was arrested." To prove that, undercover agents are often careful to stress that the accused has multiple choices, and they then induce him into choosing with his own volition to commit the crime. In this case, that was achieved by the undercover FBI agent's allegedly advising Mohamud that there were at least five ways he could serve the cause of Islam (including by praying, studying engineering, raising funds to send overseas, or becoming "operational"), and Mohamud replied he wanted to "be operational" by using exploding a bomb (para. 35-37).

But strangely, while all other conversations with Mohamud which the FBI summarizes were (according to the affidavit) recorded by numerous recording devices, this conversation -- the crucial one for negating Mohamud's entrapment defense -- was not. That's because, according to the FBI, the undercover agent "was equipped with audio equipment to record the meeting. However, due to technical problems, the meeting was not recorded" (para. 37).

Thus, we have only the FBI's word, and only its version, for what was said during this crucial -- potentially dispositive -- conversation. Also strangely: the original New York Times article on this story described this conversation at some length and reported the fact that "that meeting was not recorded due to a technical difficulty," but the final version omitted that, instead simply repeating the FBI's story as though it were fact: "undercover agents in Mr. Mohamud’s case offered him several nonfatal ways to serve his cause, including mere prayer. But he told the agents he wanted to be 'operational,' and perhaps execute a car bombing."

Third, there are ample facts that call into question whether Mohamud's actions were driven by the FBI's manipulation and pressure rather than his own predisposition to commit a crime. In June, he attempted to fly to Alaska in order to work on a fishing job he obtained through a friend, but he was on the Government's no-fly list. That caused the FBI to question him at the airport and then bar him from flying to Alaska, and thus prevented him from earning income with this job (para. 25). Having prevented him from working, the money the FBI then pumped him with -- including almost $3,000 in cash for him to rent his own apartment (para. 61) -- surely helped make him receptive to their suggestions and influence. And every other step taken to perpetrate this plot -- from planning its placement to assembling the materials to constructing the bomb -- was all done at the FBI's behest and with its indispensable support and direction.

It's impossible to conceive of Mohamud having achieved anything on his own. Before being ensnared by the FBI, the only tangible action he had taken was to write three articles on "fitness and jihad" for the online magazine Jihad Recollections. At least based on what is known, he had no history of violence, no apparent criminal record, had never been to a training camp in Afghanistan, Pakistan or anywhere else, and -- before meeting the FBI -- had never taken a single step toward harming anyone. Does that sound like some menacing sleeper Terrorist to you?

Finally, there is, as usual, no discussion whatsoever in media accounts of motive. There are several statements attributed to Mohamud by the Affidavit that should be repellent to any decent person, including complete apathy -- even delight -- at the prospect that this bomb would kill innocent people, including children. What would drive a 19-year-old American citizen -- living in the U.S. since the age of 3 -- to that level of sociopathic indifference? He explained it himself in several passages quoted by the FBI, and -- if it weren't for the virtual media blackout of this issue -- this line of reasoning would be extremely familiar to Americans by now (para. 45):

Undercover FBI Agent: You know there's gonna be a lot of children there?

Mohamud: Yeah, I know, that's what I'm looking for.

Undercover FBI Agent: For kids?

Mohamud: No, just for, in general a huge mass that will, like for them you know to be attacked in their own element with their families celebrating the holidays. And then for later to be saying, this was them for you to refrain from killing our children, women . . . . so when they hear all these families were killed in such a city, they'll say you know what your actions, you know they will stop, you know. And it's not fair that they should do that to people and not feeling it.

And here's what he allegedly said in a video he made shortly before he thought he would be detonating the bomb (para. 80):

We hear the same exact thing over and over and over from accused Terrorists -- that they are attempting to carry out plots in retaliation for past and ongoing American violence against Muslim civilians and to deter such future acts. Here we find one of the great mysteries in American political culture: that the U.S. Government dispatches its military all over the world -- invading, occupying, and bombing multiple Muslim countries -- torturing them, imprisoning them without charges, shooting them up at checkpoints, sending remote-controlled drones to explode their homes, imposing sanctions that starve hundreds of thousands of children to death -- and Americans are then baffled when some Muslims -- an amazingly small percentage -- harbor anger and vengeance toward them and want to return the violence. And here we also find the greatest myth in American political discourse: that engaging in all of that military aggression somehow constitutes Staying Safe and combating Terrorism -- rather than doing more than any single other cause to provoke, sustain and fuel Terrorism.

UPDATE: A very similar thing happened last month when the FBI announced that it had arrested someone who was planning to bomb the DC Metro system when, in reality, "the only plotting he did was in response to instructions from federal agents he thought were accomplices." That concocted FBI plot then led to the Metro Police announcing a new policy of random searches of passengers' bags.

Meanwhile, in Oregon, the mosque sometimes attended by Mohamud was victimized today by arson. So the FBI did not stop any actual Terrorist plots, but they may have helped inspire one.

SOURCE: http://www.salon.com/news/terrorism/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2010/11/28/fbi

Fire set to terror suspect's mosque

Sunday, Nov 28, 2010 15:03 ET
Fire set to terror suspect's mosque
A possible arsonist attacks the Salman Alfarisi Islamic Center, where the alleged Portland terror plotter worshiped
By JONATHAN COOPER and NIGEL DUARA, Associated Press
Salon
Anger on Sunday over a Somali-born teen's failed plan to blow up a van full of explosives during Portland's Christmas tree lighting ceremony erupted in arson on Sunday when a fire damaged an Islamic center frequented by the suspect, authorities said.

Police don't know who started the blaze or exactly why, but they believe the Islamic center in Corvallis was targeted because terror suspect Mohamed Osman Mohamud, 19, occasionally worshipped there.

Yosof Wanly, the imam at the Salman Alfarisi Islamic Center, said he was advised by friends to take his family out of their home because of the potential threat of hate crime, and members decried the alleged arson attack. No one was injured, and the fire was contained to one room.

"We know how it is, we know some people due to ignorance are going to perceive of these things and hold most Muslims accountable," Wanly said. "We do what we can, but it's a tough situation."

The failed attack on Portland's Christmas tree lighting ceremony on Friday is testing tolerance in what has typically been a state accepting of Muslims, and the FBI warned it would not accept retribution for Mohamud's alleged plot.

The agency was working closely with leadership at the center as agents investigated the fire, said Arthur Balizan, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Oregon. A $10,000 reward was offered for information leading to an arrest.

Ahson Saeed, 25-years-old who worships at the center, called the fire "a heinous act."

The fire at the center was reported at 2:15 a.m., and evidence at the scene led authorities believe it was set intentionally, said Carla Pusateri, a fire prevention officer for the Corvallis Fire Department.

After daybreak, members gathered at the Corvallis center, where a broken window had been boarded up.

"I've prayed for my family and friends, because obviously if someone was deliberate to do this, what's to stop them from coming to our homes and our schools?" said Mohamed Alyagouri, a 31-year-old father of two, who worships at the center. "I'm afraid for my children getting harassed from their teachers, maybe from their friends."

Mohamud was being held on charges of plotting to carry out a terror attack in Portland. He is scheduled to appear in court on Monday, and it wasn't clear if he had a lawyer yet.

On Friday, he parked what he thought was a bomb-laden van near the ceremony and then went to a nearby train station, where he dialed a cell phone that he believed would detonate the vehicle, federal authorities said. Instead, federal authorities moved in and arrested him. No one was hurt.

Authorities have not explained how Mohamud, an OSU student until he dropped out on Oct. 6, became so radicalized. Mohamud graduated from high school in Beaverton, although few details of his time there were available Saturday.

Wanly described him as a normal student who went to athletic events, drank the occasional beer and was into rap music and culture. In the days leading up to his arrest Friday, however, Mohamud's friends thought he appeared at edge, Wanly said.

"He seemed to be in a state of confusion," Wanly said. "He would say things that weren't true. He'd say 'I'm going to go get married,' for example. He wasn't going to go get married."

Officials said Mohamud had no formal ties to foreign terror groups, although he had reached out to suspected terrorists in Pakistan.

FBI agents say they began investigating after receiving a tip from an unidentified person who expressed concern about Mohamud. Wanly said Mohamud was religious but didn't come to the mosque consistently.

Beginning in August 2009, court documents allege, Mohamud began e-mail communications with a friend overseas who had studied in Oregon, asking how he could travel to Pakistan and join the fight for jihad.

The e-mail exchanges led the FBI to believe that Mohamud's friend in Pakistan "had joined others involved in terrorist activities" and was inviting Mohamud to join him, prosecutors said.

Mohamud tried to board a flight to Kodak, Alaska, on June 14 of this year from Portland but wasn't allowed to board and was interviewed by the FBI, prosecutors said. Mohamud told the FBI he wanted to earn money fishing and then travel to join "the brothers." He said he had previously hoped to travel to Yemen but had never obtained a ticket or a visa.

Less than two weeks later an agent e-mailed Mohamud, pretending to be affiliated with one of the people overseas whom Mohamud had tried to contact.

Undercover agents then set up a series of face-to-face meetings with Mohamud at hotels in Portland and Corvallis.

During their first meeting on July 30, Mohamud told an agent there were a number of ways he could help "the cause," ranging from praying five times a day to "becoming a martyr."

Mohamud replied he "thought of putting an explosion together but that he needed help doing so," the documents said.

At a second meeting on Aug. 19 at a Portland hotel, the agent brought another undercover agent, the documents said, and Mohamud told them he had selected Pioneer Courthouse Square for the bombing.

On Nov. 4, in the backcountry along Oregon's coast, agents convinced Mohamud that he was testing an explosive device -- although the explosion was controlled by agents rather than the youth.

The affidavit said Mohamud was warned several times about the seriousness of his plan, that women and children could die, and that he could back out.

Prosecutors say after the trip to the backcountry, Mohamud made a video in the presence of one of the undercover agents, putting on clothes he described as "Sheik Osaka style:" a white robe, red and white headdress, and camouflage jacket. He read a statement speaking of his dream of bringing "a dark day" on Americans and blaming his family for getting in the way.

Friday, an agent and Mohamud drove into downtown Portland to the white van that carried six 55-gallon drums with detonation cords and plastic caps, but all of them were inert.

Authorities said they allowed the plot to proceed to obtain evidence to charge the suspect with attempt.

Tens of thousands of Somalis have resettled in the United States since their country plunged into lawlessness in 1991, and the U.S. has boosted aid to the country.

Wanly, the imam at the Corvallis center, said the local populace has long been accepting of Muslims.

"The common scene here is to be very friendly, accepting various cultures and religions," Wanly said. "The Islamic center has been here for 40 years, it's more American than most Americans with regards to age."

------
SOURCE: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/11/28/us_portland_car_bomb_plot/index.html

What Makes a Will Islamic?

What Makes a Will Islamic?
Fractions.
By Julia Felsenthal
Posted Thursday, Nov. 11, 2010, at 6:54 PM ET
Slate

A federal judge blocked an Oklahoma amendment on Monday that would prevent state courts from relying on Sharia law. He issued the restraining order after the director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma, Muneer Awad, filed a suit claiming the measure was unconstitutional and that it would effectively nullify his Islamic will. What, exactly, makes a will Islamic?

Incredibly specific inheritance laws. Verses 11, 12, and 176 in the fourth book of the Quran lay out exactly how a Muslim should dispose of his wealth after death. Two-thirds must be distributed as follows, when applicable: One-sixth should go to your father; one-sixth to your mother; half or one-quarter to your husband, depending on whether you've had children; and one-quarter or one-eighth to your wife, also depending on whether you've had children. As for those hypothetical kids, the fractions vary, but boys get two shares for every one share that girls get.

Sunnis and Shi'ites disagree on how to allocate the remaining one-third. Sunnis can give it to whomever they choose, so long as the recipient isn't also getting a piece of the initial two-thirds. Shi'ites do not have the same prohibition; they can bequeath all or part of the last third to a favored relative or, if they want to even out the 2-to-1 gender differential mentioned above, bequeath it to their daughters.

Depending on the number of relatives, the calculations that go into determining these fractions can become quite complicated. Back in the 800s, a Persian mathematician named al-Khwarizmi wrote a book called Kitad al-jabr wal-muqabalah that laid out the principles of algebra. One of the problems al-Khwarizmi's book addressed was the calculation of inheritance under Islam. These days, Muslim lawyers drawing up wills for their clients will often use software programs to determine the various shares.
Advertisement

In a Muslim society in which Sharia law also functions as civil law, it is not necessary to have a will, since Islamic inheritance laws are the default. In places outside of the Islamic world where wills are necessary (like the United States), Muslims sometimes include a preamble declaring their faith in Allah—but this is not essential; the fact of having an Islamic will is itself a declaration of faith. Islamic wills also frequently include specific instructions on funeral and burial rites, as dictated by the Quran. But since Muslim custom calls for burial as soon as possible after death, those questions are often moot by the time the will is read.

As for why these laws were developed in the first place, the Quran states: "[Y]our parents and your children—you know not which of them is more deserving of benefit from you." That's been interpreted to mean that in Islam, only God can make distinctions between one relative and another. So it's safer to follow pre-determined inheritance shares. From a social and economic perspective, the emphasis on distributing more wealth to sons serves the purposes of a patriarchal society, in which men are the breadwinners and sons bear the responsibility of taking care of their aging parents.

Got a question about today's news? Ask the Explainer.

Explainer thanks Shaykh Mohammed Amin of the Daral Qasim institute; Leor Halevi, author of Muhammad's Grave: Death Rites and the Making of Islamic Society; Hyder A. Naqvi of Ahmad & Naqvi; David Powers of Cornell University; Amina Saeed of the Muslim Bar Association of Chicago; and Ahmed Shaikh.

SOURCE: http://www.slate.com/id/2274560/